Ethics Statement

We are committed to maintaining the highest standards of publication ethics and to supporting ethical research practices. We adhere to the COPE Code of Conduct for Journal Publishers. Allegations of misconduct will be investigated in accordance with the COPE Best Practice Guidelines as far as is practicable.

Authorship

We expect all published articles to contain clear and accurate attribution of authorship. It is the responsibility of the author to ensure that all authors that contributed to the work are fairly acknowledged and that the published author list accurately reflects individual contributions.

a. Attribution and acknowledgement

Authorship is confined to those who have made a significant contribution to the design and execution of the work described.

b. Changes in authorship

Requests for changes to authorship should be dealt with fairly and in accordance with the relevant COPE guidelines (detailed below). Changes in authorship will only be permitted where valid reasons are provided and all authors are in agreement with the change.

c. ‘Ghost,’ ‘guest,’ or ‘gift’ authorship

We consider all forms of ghost, guest, and gift authorship to be unethical. Any allegation of ghost, guest, or gift authorship will be investigated in accordance with the COPE guidelines listed here. Where such practices are identified the authors in question will be removed from an article through a post-publication correction.

‘Ghost’ authorship refers to the practice of using a non-named author to write or prepare an article for publication. Ghost authors are typically (but not exclusively) paid sponsors, employees, junior researchers, or external academic affiliates.

‘Guest’ or ‘gift’ authorship refers to the practice of naming an individual that made little or no contribution to a study as an author on an article. Gift authors are typically (but not exclusively) senior researchers, affiliated researchers, friends, or colleagues of the principle author. There are also organisations that offer gift authorship for a fee.

Article submission

We take every effort to ensure that editors, peer reviewers, and journal administrators treat all submissions respectfully, in confidence, and in accordance with COPE ethical guidelines. We expect that all individuals submitting manuscripts to CEEMR abide by established publishing standards and ethics. In proven cases of misconduct, the following actions may be taken:

  • Retraction of published work.
  • Publication of a correction or statement of concern.
  • Refusal of future submission.
  • Notification of misconduct sent to an author’s local institution, superior, and/or ethics committee.

a. Redundant publication (dual submission or publication)

We evaluate submissions on the understanding that they have not been previously published in or simultaneously submitted to another journal. We investigate allegations of redundant publication thoroughly and in accordance with COPE guidelines detailed here.

b. Plagiarism

We evaluate submissions on the understanding that they are the original work of the author(s). We expect that references made in a manuscript or article to another person’s work or idea will be credited appropriately. Equally we expect authors to gain all appropriate permissions prior to publication. Guidelines on when permissions are required and how to seek permissions are available here.

Re-use of text, data, figures, or images without appropriate acknowledgment or permission is considered plagiarism, as is the paraphrasing of text, concepts, and ideas. All allegations of plagiarism are investigated thoroughly and in accordance with COPE guidelines detailed here.

c. Defamation

Whilst striving to promote freedom of expression wherever possible, we aim to avoid publishing anything that harms the reputation of an individual, business, group, or organization unless it can be proven to be true. We take all possible measures to ensure that published work is free of any text that is, or may be considered to be libellous, slanderous, or defamatory.

Conflict of interest

We are committed to transparency in areas of potential conflict of interest.

a. Authors

Conflict of interest exists when an author’s private interests might be seen as influencing the objectivity of research or experiment, to the point that a reasonable observer might wonder if the individual’s behaviour or judgement was motivated by considerations of his or her competing interests. It is the responsibility of a manuscript’s corresponding author to confirm if co-authors hold any conflict of interest. The following should also be declared, either through the Acknowledgements section of the manuscript or at the point of submission:

  • All sources of research funding, including direct and indirect financial support, supply of equipment, or materials (including specialist statistical assistance).
  • The role of the research funder(s) or sponsor(s), if any, in the research design, analysis, interpretation and reporting.
  • Any relevant financial and non-financial interests and relationships that might be considered likely to affect the interpretation of their findings or that editors, reviewers, or readers might reasonably wish to know.

When considering whether to declare a conflicting interest or connection we encourage authors to consider how they would answer the following question: Is there any arrangement that would embarrass you or any of your co-authors if it was to emerge after publication and you had not declared it?

b. Editors

Editors are obliged to declare any potential conflict of interest that might arise during the term of editorship prior to entry into any agreement or position. They are also required to recuse themselves from individual manuscripts if they themselves have a potential conflict of interest and to avoid creating potential conflicts of interest through assignment of handling editors or peer reviewers.

c. Reviewers

Editors consider potential conflicts of interest when assigning reviewers.

Fair editing and peer review

We encourage all participants in the publishing process to adhere to established principles of ethical publishing. This extends from authors to journal editors, reviewers and journal administrators.

a. Peer review and reviewer conduct

Manuscripts are reviewed by two independent experts in the relevant area. The reviewers make a scientific assessment and a recommendation to the editors. Reviewers remain unknown to authors. The Handling editor considers the manuscript and the reviewers’ comments before making a final decision either to accept, accept with revision or to reject a manuscript.

b. Confidentiality

We expect editors and reviewers to handle all submissions in confidence. If a reviewer wishes to delegate the review or seek the opinion of a colleague on a specific aspect of the paper, they are expected to clear this with the editor in the first instance.

Any suggestion that an editor or reviewer is appropriating ideas from a manuscript they handled for a journal will be thoroughly investigated in accordance with the following COPE guidelines: http://publicationethics.org/files/u7140/Appropriated.pdf.